While President Arroyo was able to survive all attempts to eject her out from power, her acceptability rating has steadily plunging down. The latest survey showed her popularity rating to record low negative 38 points from negative 26 in March. This makes president Arroyo the most unpopular president of the Philippines since Marcos,

Malacanang however countered that it should be the people who will judge the president, not surveys. Executive secretary Eduardo Ermita,however, said that “running and managing the country is no popularity contest.”

It has been perceived that it is the passing in Congress of the Extended Value Added (EVAT) which made the president unpopular apart from the accusations of election fraud and a number of controversies of corruption and fraud in her administration. So far nothing has actually been proven in court.

About P8 billion worth of subsidies has been given to the poor since January of this year according to Ermita. The amount used came from the collection of extended Value Added Tax. Dole out services for the poor, conceived by Malacanang, include subsidizing cheap rice, subsidies to “lifeline users” of electricity, microfinance programs for wives of transport drivers, etc. Ermita is wondering why the president is still unpopular to the people despite all her efforts to help the poor.

Ermita however does not consider the survey result credible, it is something inaccurate that you don’t take in seriously.

More on the survey report from Teresa Cerojano.

Arroyo’s approval rating in Philippines hits low

TERESA CEROJANO,Associated Press Writer

MANILA, Philippines – Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s public support rating plunged last month to a record low, making her the country’s most unpopular president since democracy was restored in 1986, a survey showed Friday.

The independent Social Weather Stations survey found that 22 percent of Filipinos were satisfied and 60 percent dissatisfied with Arroyo’s performance.

The net satisfaction rating _ the difference between those satisfied and dissatisfied _ plunged to negative 38 points from negative 26 in March.

The rating was the lowest for any Philippine president since 1986, when Corazon Aquino restored democracy after leading a popular “people power” revolt that toppled longtime dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

Arroyo is the longest-serving head of state since Marcos. She took over the presidency after Joseph Estrada was toppled on corruption charges in the country’s second “people power” uprising in 2001, and then went on to win her own election mandate in 2004.

She has survived four attempted power grabs and three opposition impeachment attempts on allegations she cheated in the 2004 vote.

Arroyo’s chief of staff, Cerge Remonde, blamed the poor ratings on high oil and food prices. He also said the public reacted negatively to Arroyo’s decision to continue with a trip to the U.S. in June despite a typhoon in the Philippines that left hundreds of people dead and missing.

“While the president is sensitive to public opinion, she took an oath that requires her to do what is right and not what is popular,” he said.

While Arroyo has been credited with making economic reforms, she has grappled with political unrest stemming from allegations of corruption and influence-peddling involving her husband and accusations of human rights violations.

Social Weather Stations said its nationwide survey of 1,200 adults was conducted June 27-30 and had a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

But now that the surveys are against them, they are saying that the surveys are not credible.

The poor as judges of Arroyo’s performance? Unless the poor was able to graduate from poverty under Arroyo’s administration, that would be great. But if the Arroyo just distributed rice and noodles to this poor people, what kind of performance is that?

Thank you J.A.Carizo for visiting and your brilliant comment.
Right Malacanang is allergic to surveys specially if President Arroyo’s popularity is going down the lowest. Dole out services in the long run may jeopardize the initiative of the poor to strive and “graduate from poverty.”